Steve Stamkos?

[Bill_Berg]

For all we know he'll start declining hard at 30, for all we know the changes to goalie equipment will amount to a goal or two.

The Leafs have enough high end talent in the system? Yikes.

Edit to add, so you'll just ignore the cap issues there, eh?

What cap issues?  How many pending premium UFA's that we want to keep, are we going to need to sign two season's from now, with only two long term contracts signed?

Its a non-issue as I've said all along.

Problem is more 4 and beyond years from now than 2.

 

[TBLeafer]

For all we know he'll start declining hard at 30, for all we know the changes to goalie equipment will amount to a goal or two.

The Leafs have enough high end talent in the system? Yikes.

Edit to add, so you'll just ignore the cap issues there, eh?

What cap issues?  How many pending premium UFA's that we want to keep, are we going to need to sign two season's from now, with only two long term contracts signed?

Its a non-issue as I've said all along.

No, you said it was an issue over 10.5. 2 seasons out isn't what I'm talking about either.

Right.  My walk away is 10.5 because I think signing him for more than that puts "bad cap" on his contract that we'd probably have to eat should the time come that we'd want to trade him.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

This thread is immortal, just when you think...

 

[TBLeafer]

For all we know he'll start declining hard at 30, for all we know the changes to goalie equipment will amount to a goal or two.

The Leafs have enough high end talent in the system? Yikes.

Edit to add, so you'll just ignore the cap issues there, eh?

What cap issues?  How many pending premium UFA's that we want to keep, are we going to need to sign two season's from now, with only two long term contracts signed?

Its a non-issue as I've said all along.

Problem is more 4 and beyond years from now than 2.

You mean when the cap goes up, Tavares and Seguin get more than Toews and Kane money and we've had our first or second year contending for the cup?

And if he continued to contribute more or less at the level he is known for as a Leaf, his cap would be a problem and we'd want to trade him, why?

 

[Zee]

I've come to terms with the Stamkos decision either way.  If the Leafs go after him i'm OK with it, if they don't I can live with that too.

I agree with the cap situation talk not really being an issue, I mean every team has big name players on huge contracts, you have to figure it out along the way based on what you have and who turns out to be elite talent.  I look at it this way, if Stamkos was originally drafted by the Leafs I think there'd be no question we would want to re-sign him to a long term deal now.  He's an elite talent and you need those types of players on your team.  27 isn't too old right now, might be an issue in the last couple years of his deal but we don't know that yet.  He could also prove to be a veteran leader for younger guys like Matthews, Marner and Nylander.

Signing Stamkos now costs the Leafs nothing in turns of players, you're just giving up cap space.  That's not an issue for the first few years of his deal as nobody else on the current roster will be signing for big money in 2-3 years.

That being said, I have total trust in this management group regardless of which road they go down with respect to Stamkos.

 

[Tigger]

For all we know he'll start declining hard at 30, for all we know the changes to goalie equipment will amount to a goal or two.

The Leafs have enough high end talent in the system? Yikes.

Edit to add, so you'll just ignore the cap issues there, eh?

What cap issues?  How many pending premium UFA's that we want to keep, are we going to need to sign two season's from now, with only two long term contracts signed?

Its a non-issue as I've said all along.

No, you said it was an issue over 10.5. 2 seasons out isn't what I'm talking about either.

Right.  My walk away is 10.5 because I think signing him for more than that puts "bad cap" on his contract that we'd probably have to eat should the time come that we'd want to trade him.

Why would they trade him? If his value is beyond question, whether at 11 or 12 million even, it stands to reason that they won't want to do that, never mind the likelihood of a full NMC.

Point is, you see a limit to his value, it's a fairly large issue and I think that only compounds over time.

I mean, I'm hopeful the Leafs do well, I'd love for them to be a contender in 4 years, but I also think that's more likely the first year we'll really see them just start to learn how to progress through the playoffs.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

This thread is immortal, just when you think...

And to think it all started because sickbeast's dad said that he was about to sign here (over a year before he actually became a free agent).

 

[herman]

I look at it this way, if Stamkos was originally drafted by the Leafs I think there'd be no question we would want to re-sign him to a long term deal now.  He's an elite talent and you need those types of players on your team.  27 isn't too old right now, might be an issue in the last couple years of his deal but we don't know that yet.  He could also prove to be a veteran leader for younger guys like Matthews, Marner and Nylander.

Signing Stamkos now costs the Leafs nothing in turns of players, you're just giving up cap space.  That's not an issue for the first few years of his deal as nobody else on the current roster will be signing for big money in 2-3 years.

That being said, I have total trust in this management group regardless of which road they go down with respect to Stamkos.

To that first point of re-signing, I think it was busta who addressed it earlier.
If Stamkos was ours to begin with, not signing him = losing his contribution.
This situation is, do we want to tie up our cap space now and push to contend, or later when we know what we have and need?

 

[LuncheonMeat]

For all we know he'll start declining hard at 30, for all we know the changes to goalie equipment will amount to a goal or two.

The Leafs have enough high end talent in the system? Yikes.

Edit to add, so you'll just ignore the cap issues there, eh?

What cap issues?  How many pending premium UFA's that we want to keep, are we going to need to sign two season's from now, with only two long term contracts signed?

Its a non-issue as I've said all along.

Problem is more 4 and beyond years from now than 2.

You mean when the cap goes up, Tavares and Seguin get more than Toews and Kane money and we've had our first or second year contending for the cup?

And if he continued to contribute more or less at the level he is known for as a Leaf, his cap would be a problem and we'd want to trade him, why?

I think he was referring to the 'other' 5 years (past your 2) that Stamkos is tying up 10+ million on the cap. You know, the years when the Leafs have to re-sign all the elite prospects that their farm system is flush with.

As far as the cap going up, it has been anything but predictable the past couple of years. And if it does go up, so do player salaries. You don't just gain more room.

 

[TBLeafer]

I look at it this way, if Stamkos was originally drafted by the Leafs I think there'd be no question we would want to re-sign him to a long term deal now.  He's an elite talent and you need those types of players on your team.  27 isn't too old right now, might be an issue in the last couple years of his deal but we don't know that yet.  He could also prove to be a veteran leader for younger guys like Matthews, Marner and Nylander.

Signing Stamkos now costs the Leafs nothing in turns of players, you're just giving up cap space.  That's not an issue for the first few years of his deal as nobody else on the current roster will be signing for big money in 2-3 years.

That being said, I have total trust in this management group regardless of which road they go down with respect to Stamkos.

To that first point of re-signing, I think it was busta who addressed it earlier.
If Stamkos was ours to begin with, not signing him = losing his contribution.
This situation is, do we want to tie up our cap space now and push to contend, or later when we know what we have and need?

Again, I remember when the season ended and Leafs fans stated we need every key role filled as long as it doesn't cost us our future.

Stamkos fills a key role and doesn't cost us our future as long as he doesn't impede future key signings during the length of his contract.

Right now, he would fit quite nicely in our top six.

 

[TBLeafer]

For all we know he'll start declining hard at 30, for all we know the changes to goalie equipment will amount to a goal or two.

The Leafs have enough high end talent in the system? Yikes.

Edit to add, so you'll just ignore the cap issues there, eh?

What cap issues?  How many pending premium UFA's that we want to keep, are we going to need to sign two season's from now, with only two long term contracts signed?

Its a non-issue as I've said all along.

Problem is more 4 and beyond years from now than 2.

You mean when the cap goes up, Tavares and Seguin get more than Toews and Kane money and we've had our first or second year contending for the cup?

And if he continued to contribute more or less at the level he is known for as a Leaf, his cap would be a problem and we'd want to trade him, why?

I think he was referring to the 'other' 5 years (past your 2) that Stamkos is tying up 10+ million on the cap. You know, the years when the Leafs have to re-sign all the elite prospects that their farm system is flush with.

As far as the cap going up, it has been anything but predictable the past couple of years. And if it does go up, so do player salaries. You don't just gain more room.

You mean the RFA contracts Shannyco has full control over?

 

[TBLeafer]

For all we know he'll start declining hard at 30, for all we know the changes to goalie equipment will amount to a goal or two.

The Leafs have enough high end talent in the system? Yikes.

Edit to add, so you'll just ignore the cap issues there, eh?

What cap issues?  How many pending premium UFA's that we want to keep, are we going to need to sign two season's from now, with only two long term contracts signed?

Its a non-issue as I've said all along.

No, you said it was an issue over 10.5. 2 seasons out isn't what I'm talking about either.

Right.  My walk away is 10.5 because I think signing him for more than that puts "bad cap" on his contract that we'd probably have to eat should the time come that we'd want to trade him.

Why would they trade him? If his value is beyond question, whether at 11 or 12 million even, it stands to reason that they won't want to do that, never mind the likelihood of a full NMC.

Point is, you see a limit to his value, it's a fairly large issue and I think that only compounds over time.

I mean, I'm hopeful the Leafs do well, I'd love for them to be a contender in 4 years, but I also think that's more likely the first year we'll really see them just start to learn how to progress through the playoffs.

I don't think they would want to trade him but anything is possible.

 

[Zee]

For all we know he'll start declining hard at 30, for all we know the changes to goalie equipment will amount to a goal or two.

The Leafs have enough high end talent in the system? Yikes.

Edit to add, so you'll just ignore the cap issues there, eh?

What cap issues?  How many pending premium UFA's that we want to keep, are we going to need to sign two season's from now, with only two long term contracts signed?

Its a non-issue as I've said all along.

Problem is more 4 and beyond years from now than 2.

You mean when the cap goes up, Tavares and Seguin get more than Toews and Kane money and we've had our first or second year contending for the cup?

And if he continued to contribute more or less at the level he is known for as a Leaf, his cap would be a problem and we'd want to trade him, why?

I think he was referring to the 'other' 5 years (past your 2) that Stamkos is tying up 10+ million on the cap. You know, the years when the Leafs have to re-sign all the elite prospects that their farm system is flush with.

As far as the cap going up, it has been anything but predictable the past couple of years. And if it does go up, so do player salaries. You don't just gain more room.

You can't assume all the prospects on the Marlies will turn into elite talent.  Who knows how many, or IF any turn into those types of players.  I don't know how successful a team would be if they decided not to sign players to big contracts today for fear that 4-5 years down the road they'd have to worry about signing other guys.

 

[Kin]

To that first point of re-signing, I think it was busta who addressed it earlier.
If Stamkos was ours to begin with, not signing him = losing his contribution.
This situation is, do we want to tie up our cap space now and push to contend, or later when we know what we have and need?

Also, being as one of the main points about not signing Stamkos is investing too heavily in any one position it has to be said that if Stamkos had been on the team the last three years it's pretty likely the team wouldn't have used their three straight top ten picks with an eye towards finding a #1 center.

 

[herman]

I look at it this way, if Stamkos was originally drafted by the Leafs I think there'd be no question we would want to re-sign him to a long term deal now.  He's an elite talent and you need those types of players on your team.  27 isn't too old right now, might be an issue in the last couple years of his deal but we don't know that yet.  He could also prove to be a veteran leader for younger guys like Matthews, Marner and Nylander.

Signing Stamkos now costs the Leafs nothing in turns of players, you're just giving up cap space.  That's not an issue for the first few years of his deal as nobody else on the current roster will be signing for big money in 2-3 years.

That being said, I have total trust in this management group regardless of which road they go down with respect to Stamkos.

To that first point of re-signing, I think it was busta who addressed it earlier.
If Stamkos was ours to begin with, not signing him = losing his contribution.
This situation is, do we want to tie up our cap space now and push to contend, or later when we know what we have and need?

Again, I remember when the season ended and Leafs fans stated we need every key role filled as long as it doesn't cost us our future.

Stamkos fills a key role and doesn't cost us our future as long as he doesn't impede future key signings during the length of his contract.

Right now, he would fit quite nicely in our top six.

We'd want those roles filled eventually. They don't need to be immediately filled, and it certainly doesn't need to be with a 10.5M dollar man when we're still in the foundation building and assessment phase.

 

[Tigger]

You can't assume all the prospects on the Marlies will turn into elite talent.  Who knows how many, or IF any turn into those types of players.  I don't know how successful a team would be if they decided not to sign players to big contracts today for fear that 4-5 years down the road they'd have to worry about signing other guys.

Right, and to an extent that's fair, it also suggests that the team should probably find out what they have first.

 

[herman]

To that first point of re-signing, I think it was busta who addressed it earlier.
If Stamkos was ours to begin with, not signing him = losing his contribution.
This situation is, do we want to tie up our cap space now and push to contend, or later when we know what we have and need?

Also, being as one of the main points about not signing Stamkos is investing too heavily in any one position it has to be said that if Stamkos had been on the team the last three years it's pretty likely the team wouldn't have used their three straight top ten picks with an eye towards finding a #1 center.

Would we even have had that many top 10 picks? Oh wait, Carlyle.

 

[Kin]

You can't assume all the prospects on the Marlies will turn into elite talent.  Who knows how many, or IF any turn into those types of players.

That's very true but that's a point the anti-Stamkos crowd has made more consistently than the pro-Stamkos crowd. The people who are loudly advocating for Stamkos to be signed in this thread are doing so on the basis of assuming that all of the Leafs' top prospects work out spectacularly and the team doesn't need any more high first round picks.

 

[LuncheonMeat]

For all we know he'll start declining hard at 30, for all we know the changes to goalie equipment will amount to a goal or two.

The Leafs have enough high end talent in the system? Yikes.

Edit to add, so you'll just ignore the cap issues there, eh?

What cap issues?  How many pending premium UFA's that we want to keep, are we going to need to sign two season's from now, with only two long term contracts signed?

Its a non-issue as I've said all along.

Problem is more 4 and beyond years from now than 2.

You mean when the cap goes up, Tavares and Seguin get more than Toews and Kane money and we've had our first or second year contending for the cup?

And if he continued to contribute more or less at the level he is known for as a Leaf, his cap would be a problem and we'd want to trade him, why?

I think he was referring to the 'other' 5 years (past your 2) that Stamkos is tying up 10+ million on the cap. You know, the years when the Leafs have to re-sign all the elite prospects that their farm system is flush with.

As far as the cap going up, it has been anything but predictable the past couple of years. And if it does go up, so do player salaries. You don't just gain more room.

You can't assume all the prospects on the Marlies will turn into elite talent.  Who knows how many, or IF any turn into those types of players.  I don't know how successful a team would be if they decided not to sign players to big contracts today for fear that 4-5 years down the road they'd have to worry about signing other guys.

That was sarcasm. It was in reference to TBL saying the Leafs have enough prospects in their farm system already.

 

[TBLeafer]

I look at it this way, if Stamkos was originally drafted by the Leafs I think there'd be no question we would want to re-sign him to a long term deal now.  He's an elite talent and you need those types of players on your team.  27 isn't too old right now, might be an issue in the last couple years of his deal but we don't know that yet.  He could also prove to be a veteran leader for younger guys like Matthews, Marner and Nylander.

Signing Stamkos now costs the Leafs nothing in turns of players, you're just giving up cap space.  That's not an issue for the first few years of his deal as nobody else on the current roster will be signing for big money in 2-3 years.

That being said, I have total trust in this management group regardless of which road they go down with respect to Stamkos.

To that first point of re-signing, I think it was busta who addressed it earlier.
If Stamkos was ours to begin with, not signing him = losing his contribution.
This situation is, do we want to tie up our cap space now and push to contend, or later when we know what we have and need?

Again, I remember when the season ended and Leafs fans stated we need every key role filled as long as it doesn't cost us our future.

Stamkos fills a key role and doesn't cost us our future as long as he doesn't impede future key signings during the length of his contract.

Right now, he would fit quite nicely in our top six.

We'd want those roles filled eventually. They don't need to be immediately filled, and it certainly doesn't need to be with a 10.5M dollar man when we're still in the foundation building and assessment phase.

No, I'm pretty sure management still wants those roles filled as quickly and efficiently as possible.

That's why my walkaway from Stamkos is 10.5AAV.  Beyond that he starts to become too inefficient to sign and build a team with, in addition to what I'd consider "bad cap" money we'd have to eat if the time ever came where we'd want to trade him.